Full size 4x4s

[noodles]

Ok this thread is to get the feelings of everybody out, this way we can have the same thing beind us if a number of different people do decide to write, or go to one of the ORV meetings.

1. fullsizes are getign ripped of by paying as much as the quads and bikes,yet not having asmany places to ride.

2 if all the trails were made to fit fullsizes, quads and bikes would be able to go down them, this way the state could increase the number of trails, but cut down on the cost becasue every orv can fit on them.

3 ORV needs to be redifined because the way i have read it, it doesnt enclude fullsizes..........

other opinions are welcome.....

[Yetti]

Noodles if I may say the reason the "full size" isn't in the orv discription is becasue the state likes your money. they expect you to make it street legal and BUY a plate. they expect you to BUY a ORV sticker to play the scrammble areas, they expect to see you at silver lake sand dunes and the fact you have to BUY a state park sticker and & BUY an ORV sticker just to pull out of their lot. I would think that most folks have it figured out, so don't think they are going to give you anything without a fight. we at the "club" are fighting the state at every turn to get more of any kind of trail or route. they are hard core againest the opening of state rec areas that used to accomodate the whole gambit of ORVs , but in the end you still can drive forest roads that we are not aloud on with just a sticker, we cannot come into town for gas or food in most areas and the current ORV gives my 8 year old to the right to operate my Hummer in the scrammble areas with an approved orv certificate. so make sense of that and you will be one up on everyone.

[brewmenn]

I do not think widening every trail in the state to accomodate every vehicle is a good solution. I think that what should be done is to keep the ATV and bike trails mostly the way they are, but creat a new class of trails, "full size trails" that would be open to every size vehicles. These would not be the current "ORV routes" which are really just forest roads that they like non SOS licenced ORV's down, these would be actual trails with challenges. There are some current "ORV trails" that are allready wide enough for a truck, and there are a few (very few) ORV routes that are OK for wheeling (nothing hard core, but at least interesting in the stock vehicle), and there are many other trails that are runnable but are off limits because they would require 4 wheel drive. I think that getting an official designation like this is the only way well ever see a change.

I've given this lots of thought and plan to write up a proposal, I would then need someone to try to get it through the state legislature.

[Yetti]

given the fact that widest road vehicles we run into as of now are H1 hummers & 1 ton duallys. the prospect of 96" trails would be the best even giving a 90" designation would be great, that way when you run 1 ton dually axles you can still be legal. the right way is the hardest to find, so do a bit of thinking and get back here so we can hear what you came up with.

[noodles]

what do you mean the right away for the 1 ton axles?? yes i do agree that a benifit of having a truck is that we can go in to town and get gass and stuff, but yet, there isnt many actual places to wheel... i mean yeah we go on the seasional roads up here but they arnt that intersting we have the little side trails and pits off to the side. I have seen and heard of alot of quad trails, and other trails that are for the 50" wide orv. This is kewl that the state has these, im just saying id like to get some open for the full sizes, ya know? i dont want to screw it up for the little guys with the atvs and dirt bikes. I am not sure how to go around this. but even like you said, we have to pay for the orv sticker, the state pass inorder to get in to the land. and on top of that all we have to have the insurance and licence plate.. I am not sure because i dont own a quad, but quads dont need the insurance and a licence plate correct?? if i am wrong, please correct me.

Like i said, im not out to screw anybody over, I just want more places.. becasue even like at silver or any place else, quads can go where ever the fullsizes go. I will be thinking about this more over thanksgiving, but yeah just wanted to get peoples wheels truning ya know?... BTW blues brothers 2000 is a funny movie. very weird..lol, anyway , have a good thanksgiving.

[brewmenn]

yeah, the width of trails is one point I'm stuck on. Interesingly enough, I've been told that the spec for a "ORV route" is only 72 inches, thats barely enough for my Jeep to fit down. While I don't nessacarily think it needs to be wide enough to drive a dually down, and then type of trails I have in mind would certianly not be the type that you would or could drive a stock dually down, I'd hate to not have them wide enough for a H1, however wide they are. They are probably as wide as a dually aren't they.

[rm25x]

Originally Posted by noodles

Ok this thread is to get the feelings of everybody out, this way we can have the same thing beind us if a number of different people do decide to write, or go to one of the ORV meetings.

1. fullsizes are getign ripped of by paying as much as the quads and bikes,yet not having asmany places to ride.

2 if all the trails were made to fit fullsizes, quads and bikes would be able to go down them, this way the state could increase the number of trails, but cut down on the cost becasue every orv can fit on them.

3 ORV needs to be redifined because the way i have read it, it doesnt enclude fullsizes..........

other opinions are welcome.....

:gay:

[brewmenn]

OK the book I have lists H1 at 86.5 inches wide. I would not want to go wider than that. A dually would have no business being on the type of trail I'm purposing.

[SKIP]

Yetti's point was 1 ton dually axles...

Not actually running a fullsize dually "truck" down the trail. Only it's axles under your "insert desired vehicle here".

At least that's the way I interpreted it.

Yetti, is this what you meant?

[Yetti]

Originally Posted by SKIP

Yetti's point was 1 ton dually axles...

Not actually running a fullsize dually "truck" down the trail. Only it's axles under your "insert desired vehicle here".

At least that's the way I interpreted it.

Yetti, is this what you meant?

yep!
I see it a couple of different ways. the state has the opertunity to open up 25% more trail by 2008, if we lobby hard NOW we have very good chance of getting the improved sized routes. if you guys sit in the forums and bicth about it then not much will ever happen. we saw a full room at the orv board meeting last time, but we need the board to see there are thousands of us, not a few hundred.
if we shoot for 96" trails the state will say we don't want them that wide, how about 84"? then we can have enough room for the average vehicle. when you add giant tires and bushwacker fender extensions the vehicle grows wider. its just a matter of making your wants known to the state.
Brewmenn knows the one letter that made it to the meeting about the lady who lost a 9 year old to a dirt bike accident. ONE letter almost got the state to pitch a change in legislation, but in the end they deamed the laws were fine they way they were. so don't think your letters go un answered or they don't get looked at, be mindful of what you want and don't make a letter sound like your a disgruntled user, make it short and to the point.

[Mclovin]

i heard in canada you can throw turn signals on a quad and drive it down the street

[noodles]

Why is what I said gay? instead of calling me gay, why dont you say what you dont like about my thoughts. OK, and also, where is the lobby for the meetings? I have not heard about this at all. I dont know if i could ever go to one of the meetings but I know i woudl try depending on where they are at and time.

[rm25x]

Originally Posted by noodles

Ok this thread is to get the feelings of everybody out, this way we can have the same thing beind us if a number of different people do decide to write, or go to one of the ORV meetings.

1. fullsizes are getign ripped of by paying as much as the quads and bikes,yet not having asmany places to ride.

2 if all the trails were made to fit fullsizes, quads and bikes would be able to go down them, this way the state could increase the number of trails, but cut down on the cost becasue every orv can fit on them.

3 ORV needs to be redifined because the way i have read it, it doesnt enclude fullsizes..........

other opinions are welcome.....

Ok....
1. Its a whole $16.25 a year. Whooptie doo!!!!!!!!!
2. If all the trails were big enough for trucks, then they wouldn't be any fun on bikes/quads.
3. ORV covers any off-road vehicle, hense ORV....

so :gay:

[Yetti]

since the meeting are in lansing every 3 months you should be able to make a trip once or twice. I go and its an hour drive. the last meeting had guys from iron mt. their (10 hours) so I would expect to see everyone if they have an agenda to follow.

if you read the guide lines its says that what ever you want to talk about must be submitted in writing at least 2 weeks before the meeting , send the info to Steve Kubisiak. if you want to comment on things at the meeting you may have 3 minutes at the end if you fill out the card with your name on it. no matter what its recorded into the minutes of the meeting.

[brewmenn]

Theres another point that I think is being missed. While I feel that it is important to go to the ORV advisory board meetings and to work with the DNR I do not think that either of those will ever get us what we want. As far as I know all the DNR's rules and ORV advisory board actions are in order to carry out the decisions of the legislature. The definition of "ORV trails", of forest roads, of what is or isn't considered an ORV and who can use what are writen in "public acts" passed by the legislature, so for there ot be any real change, it would be the legislature that would have to make it.

[Yetti]

I guess your right, so far the the closings of the rec areas was done by Engler in `91(with nobody really watching). the L.P. was changed to closed unless posted open in `91 by Engler & DNR. the current diffentions of ORV were done by the legislature in `94. the original guide book was done in`78. so when are the changes going to reflect what we need now?

to many people just expect the rules to change at rate that suits them. I have been following this stuff a long time and I haven't seen any real changes yet. the best one the state could offer up would be their version of Ohio's house bill 286.

[noodles]

Whats so specail about Ohio's bill? Depending on the time and the day I should be able to make it but I do have some evening classes so that kinda screws things over. I will try to make them, is there anywhere i can look up the dates of the meetings? I also have heard of over in wisconson they did something like this and they got a lot of trails opened up... so I am goign to try and contact one of them and see what they did.

[Yetti]

Hey Noodles the meetings are quarterly and it helps to attend and show they board that people are there listening to their every word. BUT you can write in just as easy if you cannot make the meetings and make your wants known. so its just a matter of getting the info to them. heres the links to the minutes and other stuff
http://www.clarkstoncracker.com/grea...read.php?t=647

[noodles]

GRR I JUST LOST ALL THAT I TYPED! ok, when is the next meeting? like date and time of it. Also I know that it isnt much money for the orv but yet fullsizes still have to pay for it and there isnt as many places to go wheeling. I just have a problem with putting the sticker on my truck becasue I have to, but yet the state doesnt reconize me as a ORV... I will try and spread the word to other clubs and get more people involved.. I know its a long shot but I would love to help open new trails, even if its not for full-sizes.

[brewmenn]

Originally Posted by noodles

ok, when is the next meeting? like date and time of it.

Heres the 2006 meeting schedule:

http://www.midnr.com/publications/pd...V-SCHEDULE.pdf